This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Unreviewed Patch


 > From: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
 > 
 > On Wed, Aug 14, 2002 at 05:44:57PM +0200, Michael Matz wrote:
 > > Yes, and I think, that's bad.  There is no reason to have CLASS_MAX_NREGS
 > > or HARD_REGNO_NREGS return signed values.  (LOOP_REGNO_NREGS is defined in
 > > terms of HARD_REGNO_NREGS, so that's just the same)
 > 
 > This is why moving to target hooks is good.  Functions have a
 > better defined interface than macros.
 > r~

Agreed.  I'll have a look at these hooks.

In the mean time, can I install the original patch?

(Note, except for a couple coming from bison output, the patch
addresses all remaining signed/unsigned warnings appearing on irix6
and solaris2.)

		--Kaveh
--
Kaveh R. Ghazi			Director of Systems Architecture
ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu		Qwest Solutions


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]